Does Economics Education Make Bad Citizens? The Effect of Economics Education in Japan

Iida, Yoshio; Oda, Sobei H.

doi:10.1080/08832323.2010.511303

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to findings by Frank, Gilovich and Regan (1993), Seguino, Stevens and Lutz (1996), Frank and Schulze (2000), Hu and Liu (2003), Iida andOda, 2011, Gerlach (2017), and Kaiser et al (2018), we have not observed significant differences between decisions made by males and females. Furthermore, in our study women turned out to be less eager to contribute their resources to the common fund than their male counterparts.…”

Section: Discussion and Concluding Remarkscontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…This finding cast some doubt on whether economic education is a key determinant of students' performance in economic games. A similar conclusion came from an experiment that Iida and Oda (2011) conducted in Japan. Admittedly, the authors reported that Japanese students of economics cooperated less often in the Prisoner's Dilemma game than non-economists.…”

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Educated or Indoctrinated? Remarks on the Influence of Economic Teaching on Students’ Attitudes Based on Evidence from the Public Good Game Experiment

Dzionek‐Kozłowska

Neneman

2021

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic education is frequently blamed for negatively affecting students’ values and attitudes. Economists are reported as less cooperative, more self-interested, and more prone to free-riding. However, empirical evidence is inconclusive – certain studies support while others gainsay the so-called indoctrination hypothesis. We contribute to the discussion by running a Public Good Game (PGG) quasi-experiment. Working with economics and non-economics graduates (N = 206), we compared contributions to the common fund by representatives of both subsamples. Students’ contributions were then juxtaposed against the scores they achieved from the exam items, testing their command of game theory to detect the supposed influence of economic teaching. We hypothesised that holders of a bachelor’s degree in economics and management would contribute less to finance the common good. We also expected that those whose exam scores were higher would donate less to the common fund in the PGG. Contrary to expectations and prior empirical evidence, students holding a bachelor’s degree in economics and management made higher contributions to the common fund than their non-economics counterparts. Also, we found no correlation between the level of donations and exam scores. We conclude that there are no grounds for considering economic teaching as promoting uncooperativeness and exerting the supposed harmful influence on students’ character. We claim that economic departments provide education rather than indoctrination.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Concluding Remarkscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 70%

Educated or Indoctrinated? Remarks on the Influence of Economic Teaching on Students’ Attitudes Based on Evidence from the Public Good Game Experiment

Dzionek‐Kozłowska

Neneman

2021

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The experimental results are sometimes contradictory or difficult to replicate (cf. Iida and Oda, 2011). The survey and experimental results and field data are occasionally difficult to compare and to evaluate, and they often do not complement each other very well.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social psychological aspects of “making” economists: A review of the nature versus nurture debate

Hellmich

2020

Citizenship, Social and Economics Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A considerable number of empirical studies argue that economics experts differ from other groups with respect to their public policy preferences and their behavior in certain social dilemmas. Economists are more likely to regard allocation via markets as “fair” than other people and they seem to adjust their behavior and expectations to the actor-model presumed in the elementary neoclassical theory. Some trace back such observations to influences related to the economics education. An alternative view is that economics attracts individuals with preferences that differ from those of non-economists. While the literature on the matter is growing, a comprehensive picture of the nature and sources of the differences has not yet emerged. This article reviews research based on the survey, experimental, and field evidence collected since 1990 to detect, characterize, and explain the differences. It points at some problems inherent to the methodology that dominates the existing research. Primarily, it directs attention to some psychological and social-psychological aspects of training and socializing economists that have not found adequate recognition so far, but should be considered, to better understand the phenomena in question.

show abstract

“…The findings described above are difficult to add up to a consistent picture. Experimental results are sometimes contradictory or difficult to replicate (e.g., Iida & Oda, 2011). Survey and experimental results and real-world data are occasionally difficult to compare and to evaluate, and often do not complement each other very well.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are People Trained in Economics “Different,” and if so, Why? A Literature Review

Hellmich

2019

The American Economist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some argue that frequent confrontation with the homo economicus actor-concept motivates economists to adjust their behavior to that paradigm. Another thesis is that economists are different because the discipline attracts individuals with preferences that differ from those of noneconomists. This article discusses survey, experimental, and field evidence collected during this debate. In certain situations, there appear differences between the behavior of people trained in economics and other groups, but as the existing evidence is mostly ambiguous, a comprehensive picture of the nature and sources of these differences has not yet emerged. The article concludes that economics teachers and researchers should pay more attention to the influence the normative statements inherent in basic neoclassical economics can have on cognitive frames and interindividual processes in moral decision making. JEL Classifications: A13, A2

show abstract

Does Economics Education Make Bad Citizens? The Effect of Economics Education in Japan

Cited by 8 publications

References 10 publications

Educated or Indoctrinated? Remarks on the Influence of Economic Teaching on Students’ Attitudes Based on Evidence from the Public Good Game Experiment

Educated or Indoctrinated? Remarks on the Influence of Economic Teaching on Students’ Attitudes Based on Evidence from the Public Good Game Experiment

Social psychological aspects of “making” economists: A review of the nature versus nurture debate

Are People Trained in Economics “Different,” and if so, Why? A Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About